MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408688172 · doi:10.1080/1523908x.2025.2480691

How are local governments planning for heat mitigation? A study of Metro Vancouver and Fraser Valley jurisdictions

2025· article· en· W4408688172 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Wesley Chenne, Andréanne Doyon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Policy & Planning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental planningBusinessPublic administrationEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceGeographyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extreme heat is a growing concern for local governments, whose regulatory control of land development impacts the urban heat island effect. To better understand how local governments are responding, this study reviewed heat mitigation plans and policies from municipalities and regional districts in the historically temperate south coast of mainland British Columbia by asking how are Metro Vancouver and Fraser Valley jurisdictions planning for extreme heat? 243 documents across 29 jurisdictions (27 municipalities and two regional districts) were reviewed using a plan evaluation framework for urban heat planning and keyword searches. Our results showed that heat-mitigating interventions were not uniformly or explicitly included within or across governments. Showing a lack of consideration of extreme heat as a hazard. Urban greening and site-scale interventions were the most common across jurisdictions. We argue that effective local governance for extreme heat requires regional coordination and alignment with higher levels of government and coordination across departments within local governments.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Policy & PlanningSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207